best build for $700 gaming pc.

Do you need an OS, monitor, keyboard and mouse, etc?

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i3-4150 3.5GHz Dual-Core Processor ($109.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H97-D3H ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($92.75 @ Amazon)
Memory: Mushkin Stealth 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($65.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($53.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: PowerColor Radeon R9 270 2GB TurboDuo Video Card ($144.50 @ Newegg)
Case: Thermaltake Versa H22 ATX Mid Tower Case ($34.84 @ Amazon)
Optical Drive: LG GH24NSB0 DVD/CD Writer ($13.99 @ Newegg)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 - 64-bit (OEM) (64-bit) ($90.26 @ OutletPC)
Monitor: Gateway KX2153 Abd 60Hz 21.5" Monitor ($89.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $696.30
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-10-06 11:50 EDT-0400

Here's what I came up with, slightly over budget:

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($98.98 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Asus M5A97 R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($84.89 @ NCIX US)
Memory: Mushkin Stealth 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($65.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($53.98 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: Asus GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB Video Card ($129.99 @ NCIX US)
Case: NZXT Source 210 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case ($29.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair CX 430W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($29.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24F1ST DVD/CD Writer ($14.99 @ Amazon)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 (OEM) (64-bit) ($89.98 @ OutletPC)
Monitor: AOC e2251Swdn 60Hz 22.0" Monitor ($99.99 @ Micro Center)
Keyboard: Cooler Master CM Storm Devastator Gaming Bundle Wired Gaming Keyboard w/Optical Mouse ($27.89 @ NCIX US)
Total: $726.66
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-10-06 11:55 EDT-0400

$700 is a very tight budget if you need an OS and monitor.

$20 over your budget but here.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($98.98 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: MSI 760GM-P34(FX) Micro ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($55.59 @ OutletPC)
Memory: Mushkin Stealth 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($65.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Momentus 7200.4 500GB 2.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($39.95 @ Mwave)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 760 2GB TWIN FROZR Video Card ($184.99 @ Newegg)
Case: NZXT Source 210 (White) ATX Mid Tower Case ($39.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: Corsair CX 430W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($29.99 @ Newegg)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 (OEM) (64-bit) ($89.98 @ OutletPC)
Monitor: AOC e2251Swdn 60Hz 22.0" Monitor ($99.99 @ Micro Center)
Keyboard: Logitech K120 Wired Standard Keyboard ($7.59 @ NCIX US)
Mouse: Zalman ZM-M200 Wired Optical Mouse ($9.66 @ SuperBiiz)
Total: $722.70
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-10-06 13:03 EDT-0400

You already have windows 7?

If you already have an OS you can do this:

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($98.98 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Asus M5A97 R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($84.89 @ NCIX US)
Memory: Mushkin Stealth 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($65.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($53.98 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon R9 280 3GB WINDFORCE Video Card ($194.99 @ Newegg)
Case: NZXT Source 210 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case ($29.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair Builder 600W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($34.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24F1ST DVD/CD Writer ($14.99 @ Amazon)
Monitor: AOC e2251Swdn 60Hz 22.0" Monitor ($99.99 @ Micro Center)
Keyboard: Cooler Master CM Storm Devastator Gaming Bundle Wired Gaming Keyboard w/Optical Mouse ($29.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $708.78
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-10-07 07:46 EDT-0400

Without OS.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4460 3.2GHz Quad-Core Processor ($177.98 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H97-D3H ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($92.75 @ Amazon)
Memory: Mushkin Stealth 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($65.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($53.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: PowerColor Radeon R9 270 2GB TurboDuo Video Card ($169.99 @ Newegg)
Case: Thermaltake Versa H22 ATX Mid Tower Case ($34.84 @ Amazon)
Optical Drive: LG GH24NSB0 DVD/CD Writer ($13.99 @ Newegg)
Monitor: Gateway KX2153 Abd 60Hz 21.5" Monitor ($89.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $699.52
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-10-07 10:12 EDT-0400

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor ($139.98 @ NCIX US)
Motherboard: ASRock 970 EXTREME4 ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($74.49 @ Newegg)
Memory: Mushkin Stealth 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($65.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Western Digital RE3 500GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($40.59 @ Amazon)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 760 2GB TWIN FROZR Video Card ($184.99 @ Newegg)
Case: NZXT Source 210 (White) ATX Mid Tower Case ($39.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: Corsair CX 430W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($44.99 @ Newegg)
Monitor: AOC e2251Swdn 60Hz 22.0" Monitor ($99.99 @ Micro Center)
Total: $691.01
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-10-07 14:26 EDT-0400

That fx 6300 will bottleneck the 280x. Id recommend getting a i5 and a 270x/280.

Even at 4.5ghz, an FX 6300/6350 is slower than my i5 3570k @ stock, 3.4ghz.

They are all compatible .
There are 8 core processors available but you may never need to upgrade
Internet retailers are safe in the country I live in . I would research the store a little .

The intel fanboys are saying some interesting things . An FX 6300 will not bottleneck the graphics card . The total integer math ability of an FX 6300 is about 6% less than an intel quadcore .
The intels can do better in some games that do not use more computer cores well . Generally those are older games . In newer games there is no difference at all in cpu performance , and there can be advantages when using more cores . Online multiplayer particularly .
Here
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_fx_8350_8320_6300_processor_4300_performance_review,10.html
You can see the difference . In Farcry2 the intels perform better .
But it makes NO DIFFERENCE to the user experience . You monitor runs at 60 Hz so all you ever see is 60 fps The intels advantage is theoretical not actual . The benchmark says the intel makes 120 fps , what you see is 60 fps . The benchmark says the AMD is 100fps , what you see is 60 fps . Identical .
In a more modern game engine of Crysis the intel i5 is 1 fps ahead of the FX 6300 at 1080p .
The message could not be clearer . Spend more on the gpu and less on the cpu for a gaming build .

In this price range AMD is by far the better option . You have to buy a much weaker graphics card if you use the intel quad and that will just ruin game performance

Asus is a good brand . They have nice cooling solutions .
I would use the R9 280x if you can afford it

Performance originates with the CPU.

Nearly any GPU [within a reasonable context of current market hardware] can play nearly any game at 60FPS with different visual quality settings, but not all CPUs can play any game at 60FPS.

Don't be fooled by those who look at GPU-bound single player sequence benchmarks and then tell you that gaming performance originates with the GPU.

Popular games are compute intensive multiplayer battle simulation, compute intensive massively multiplayer role play, and compute intensive high unit count multiplayer strategy games. In every case, the ultimate bounds of performance will be set by the CPU, not the GPU. In almost every case, you won't find any benchmarks showing the actual performance under the conditions that people actually play because they are not repeatable benchmark-able sequences. The FX-6300 can bench almost any single player sequence at 100FPS+ in almost any game, but its arrangement of execution resources is poor for when the going gets "rough" in the conditions that people actually like to play games (compute intensive conditions). Furthermore, regardless of whether the game scales into many-core poorly or well, NO real-time workloads scale into more-cores as proportionally as they scale into per core performance. In non-real-time workloads, the FX-6300 can trade blows with i5's in raw execution performance, but in real time workloads performance can not scale into 6 cores as well as it scales into 4 faster cores.

I'm not an Intel Fanboy, in fact, I've never owned an Intel machine for myself. Always been AMD because they give ME more for the money for what I use my computer for: FYI: I do not play many games, and if I did, I would not be using an AMD CPU. There is no fanboyism required to see why a haswell core is better for real-time compute intensive workloads than a PileDriver module. Just look at the differences in the arrangement of execution resources and how many of those execution resources can be simultaneously leveraged for a single thread.

--------------

Another thing to keep in mind when building a gaming computer, is that there is nearly a 25% difference in compute overhead running DX11 on GCN hardware vs running DX11 on Kepler/Maxwell hardware. This applies regardless of what CPU is in play, and effects the minimum FPS in compute bound conditions significantly. An overclocked FX-6300 can actually manage to achieve similar or better minimum FPS in compute bound conditions than a stock clocked i5 haswell, if the FX-6300 is paired with maxwell/kepler, and the i5 is paired with GCN.

For a given dollar and DX11 as the target API:

• 
  FX CPUs with GCN GPUs offer the best visual quality, with the worst minimum FPS in compute bound conditions.
  FX CPUs with GK/GM GPUs offers a middle ground option balancing performance and visual quality.
  Haswell CPUs with GCN GPUs offers a middle ground option balancing performance and visual quality.
  Haswell with GK/GM GPUs offers the best performance in compute intensive conditions, with the worst visual quality.

So with that sorted out, it wouldn't be a bad idea to figure out what sort of games you actually want to play, and what conditions you expect to play them in. Multiplayer? Massive Multiplayer?

http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchmarks/page6.html

That's an excellent example of exactly what I am talking about. BF3 and BF4 will remain GPU-bound to 60FPS and beyond on almost any CPU ever made in a single player benchmarking sequence like the one linked to there. As soon as we switch to MP with 64 players, that chart is totally useless.

The closest thing I have found to an attempt at benching BF MP is this: http://pclab.pl/art55318-3.html

Knowing that such a benchmark could not have been conducted with a perfectly repeatable sequence means that the results have to be taken with some fudge factor. The trending shows that i5 haswell chips produce like 60% higher minimum FPS than an FX-6300, and the difference would indeed be noticeable, with one at ~50FPS and the other at ~30FPS, all other things being equal.

Actually its an excellent example of what I am talking about .

The R290X graphics card is not bottlenecked at 1080p resolution by even an FX 4320.
Making it insane to pay $200 for a processor when a $100 one [ like the FX 6300] will give you the exact same result , but free up that $100 extra to spend on a graphics card .

People live in a world with budgets and you will not improve a gaming computer by getting an i5 and slashing the power of the graphics card .
And an R280X will not be bottlenecked by an FX6300

At stock it will. FX 6300 is slower than an ivy i3, at stock, and that same i3 starts to bottleneck around the 270/270x mark. Clocked to FX 6350 speeds, would help considerably, as FX's single threaded performance is so poor.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/build-your-own-budget-amd-pc,3807-2.html

Not sure what your first chart proves , since it does not include an FX 6300 [ at any speed ]

But the second is interesting for showing that an OCed FX 6300 almost matches an i5 , and costs half as much .
A clear win for the FX 6300 AGAIN

Unfortunately we dont know what games . Older game engines do show a clear advantage for intel because they cannot use multiple cores . But then who is building a new computer to play skyrim or starcraft ? [ which are part of the Tomshardware test suite , usually ]

And of course if you had been using these machines in the real world you'd know the i3 tanks in multiplayer . Single player benchmarks dont mean a thing when the i3 rolls over on its back and waves its legs in the air in a 64 player scenario . The FX architecture on the other hand holds up really well . Some times better than the i5 .

To summarize : if you want to play skyrim sure an intel i3 can work , if you want to play online graphically intensive buy an FX 6300 . It performs only fractionally worse than an i5 , but costs less than half as much so you have another $120 to spend on a better graphics card

Clear now?